Researchers have argued about the interaction between sex and the occupational domain of an expert witness, and how these affect a potential expert witness' credibility. This has created a situation with conflicting results and conclusions, which has precluded a clear picture from emerging in the field. Much of the apparent conflict has been occasioned by an apparent failure to quantify a sex to occupational domain valance. To date, no known study has examined the initial attribution of credibility jurors ascribe to an expert witness based solely upon witness sex, occupational domain and the artifact of a called witness' first name. In view of the fact that this initial attribution of credibility creates a filter through which all of the subsequent testimony is processed, the initial credibility assessment becomes critical. This study explored the strength of association between anticipated sex and occupational role domains that are stereotypically held by jurors. Further, this study examined the impact expert witness sex has in relation to a high female, high male and neutral occupational domain, and the subsequent initial attribution of credibility by jurors. Findings support the conclusion that jurors identify differing levels of trust, qualification and authoritativeness with occupational domains. Findings also indicate a sex occupational domain interaction in juror attribution of authoritativeness when considering a called expert witness.

Finally, this study finds that in all conditions, a female expert witness enjoys greater ratings of individual trust as opposed to a male expert witness. Lastly, this study provides some explanation for the contradictory results of other studies.